A totally bone-headed move on the Mouse's part.  Any idiot knows these things are cyclical and that one minute you're down, the next you're up.  Plus there was a writer's strike!  That Dick Cook doesn't have a job and Tom Rothman at Fox does makes this one of the most despicable moments in movie history.  Bob Iger is going to long regret this move and pay a heavy price in the future over it.  Johnny Depp is just as likely to walk away now as he is the film Pirates 4.  And nobody would blame him either!

And what's this junk about people at the studios gunning for Cook?  I thought this kind of crap was supposed to be over under Iger's watch!  Get your house in order Bob or you'll wind up following Cook out the door!

One of the reports concerning Cook's departure is that the Studio told him it had decided to "go in another direction."  One assumes that phrase applies to Disney's movie slate, and that says to me that at least some of the projects Cook fostered are now on shaky ground.  While I'm sorry about Cook's departure, frankly, some of the projects he greenlit - like that stupid guinea pig film and the chihuahua flick - really call into question his taste and judgment. While I realize that the dog movie made some money (the guinea pig flick reportedly hasn't, thanks in part to a bloated budget), those projects did nothing to raise Disney's profile; they were the sort of things that made me cringe when I saw their trailers on TV. Ditto the announcement about that stupid Muppet movie. I know that the captive audience at the little-attended D23 loved it, but the general public is another matter altogether.  Disney shouldn't be investing its capital into such stuff, not when Dreamworks and 20th Century Fox and now Sony are breathing down its neck. Would Dreamworks buy Kukla Fran and Ollie and make a movie about them? The Muppet buy was the dumbest of Eisner's dumb moves. Disney needs to stop throwing good money after bad.

Having said all that, I do hope Pirates goes ahead. I think an audience for that is still there...but the scripting better be good.

No Dreamworks would try to remake Harvey the Rabbit.  Because THAT'S what the public has been crying out for!  And I'd love to know how Dreamworks is "breathing down Disney's neck" when DISNEY is distributing their movies?

G-Force was part of the deal with Bruckheimer.  The mouse is so in love with him that he could try to adapt a video game popular in the early nineties (oh hi Prince of Persia!) and they would fall over backwards for him.  And yes the "chihuahua flick" made a LOT of money.  Just because YOU don't like something doesn't mean there isn't an audience for it.

Cook greenlit Pirates when Eisner thought it was the dumbest idea ever.  He supported Enchanted and Remember the Titans.  He made deals with Spielberg and Zemeckis.  We actually have a shot at a Roger Rabbit sequel because of him!

And hell yes the Muppets buy was a good idea!  They're one of the ten biggest brands in the world!

Hollywood is all about relationships!  If Mr. Cook helped arrange all these great deals & is such an outstanding person, he shouldn't have any problem lining-up something new for himself -- if he even wishes to continue working.  If Zemeckis & Spielberg don't like the way they are treated then they'll leave when their contracts are up.  Bobby Iger has a pretty good record at un-ruffling feathers though.  Now lets hypothesize on who his possible replacements could be.  So many choices.  Who's to say that the next PoC movie has to have Johnny/Jack in it, couldn't just as easily introduce some new characters ... hhhmmm.

**And hell yes the Muppets buy was a good idea!  They're one of the ten biggest brands in the world!**

Disney fully expected them to generate a ton of merchandising, and they've fallen miserably short. Quote from New York Times: **Disney estimated three years ago that the Muppets would be generating about $300 million a year in merchandising sales by now, retail analysts say the total for 2008 will be closer to $50 million.**How does that say "biggest brand in the world"? One of the keys of REAL "big brands" is audience recognition and timelessness.  Disney's going to have to invest a lot of cash into reminding adults about them and try to get the kids interested. Again, cash that would be more wisely invested elsewhere.

Ooh, Mickey loves Bruckheimer? And that makes up for the flop that was G-Force HOW? Irrelevant. Yeah, the chihuahua flick made money. So did the direct-to-DVD cheapquels. Your point?

Bottom line is: Iger had conceived some reason to get rid of Cook. And not because Iger is a big old meanie. And he was hardly threatened by Cook's status. So why did he let Cook go? I've already put forth some ideas as to why. You in the meantime can rant and rave about what a wicked evil rotten guy Iger is. Myself, I think he might have made a very hard but practical decision. We'll see...

Anybody else think that if anyone should have been fired, it's Jay Rasulo?

One more thought, to follow 'Nice Guys Finish Last', from that bottomless source of Industry Wisdom, William Goldman:

When the Green-Light Guy goes out the door, all his projects go with him... because no one who follows wants to be associated with something their predecessor initiated, in case it turns out to have been a good idea after all.

Let's hope Disney doesn't (once again) throw the baby out with the bath water.

I don't doubt that Dick Cook is a nice guy, and it stinks that somebody who has such a long history with the Company got shoved out the door, but let me play devil's advocate here.

I saw Dick's presentation at D23, and honestly, except for Pirates 4 and the new Muppet movie, I didn't see a whole lot on the live-action side that grabbed my attention - and I've felt that way about Disney's live action releases for a while. Even the projects Dick approved that I thought were pretty good - like "Enchanted" -didn't do as well as the Company hoped.  Eventually, if you're in charge of an important division of a multi-billion dollar company and your division's underperforming, it's gonna come back to bite you - and it sounds like that's what happened to Dick.

All I can say is that I hope Bob has someone with some experience and moxie waiting in the wings. Orem's a marketing guy, and the Studios' marketing department hasn't exactly been firing on all cylinders, either. Orem as the new head of the Studios doesn't seem to make a whole lot of sense to me, and I can't see where having him in charge is going to do much to improve the Studios' live action numbers.

Oh, and as far as Rasulo, I agree, but for the most part, WDP&R's numbers have been pretty good. A CEO who sacks that head of a well-performing division isn't gonna look too good to the shareholders, no matter what issues you have with him.

Yes, I realize Rasulo's made some boneheaded moves, but we're not talking about making the fans hapy - we're talking about keeping the shareholders happy, and most of the big investors only care about the balance sheet, not about the product.  

Who would go see a Depp-less Pirates?  He's what made that movie, not the stunningly fantastic scripts.  The third movie was so poorly written that there are college kids that could have done a better job (they weren't even FINISHED with it when they start shooting it).  Depp IS Pirates of the Caribbean and w/o him the franchise is lost.